Cover not available
Article published In:
Contrasting contrastive approaches
Guest-edited by Bart Defrancq
[Languages in Contrast 15:1] 2015
► pp. 125–150

A discourse-based approach to some uses of the conjunction que in Romance languages

| Universidad Complutense de Madrid
The present paper compares and contrasts patterns of variation exhibited by the conjunction que in Spanish, Catalan and Italian, in root sentences — such as Que te digo que me dejes en paz (‘I’m telling you to leave me in peace’) or: Que los libros que los necesito (‘As far as the books are concerned, I need them’) — and when it appears in combination with evidential and polarity adverbs — such as Naturalmente que iré contigo (‘Of course, I will go with you’) or: Sí que iré contigo (‘Yes, I will go with you’). The focus will mainly be on the independent realizations of conjunctions in Spanish, but data from Catalan and Italian will also be analyzed, in order to show that the ways of encoding the speaker’s point of view and source of information vary across different languages. My hypothesis is that the existence of structures which combine this conjunction with evidential and polarity adverbs derives from the discourse properties of these syntactic categories. The conjunction itself can be used not only to mark subordination but also as a discourse marker, enabling the speaker to recall previously shared information or knowledge.
Keywords: conjunction, topics, Spanish/Catalan/Italian, discourse particles, polarity adverbs, evidential adverbs
Published online: 3 April 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.15.1.07ram
References (36)
Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Andersen, Gisle and Fretheim, Thorstein. 2000. Pragmatic Markers and Propositional Attitude. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Batllori, Montserrat and Hernanz, María Luisa. 2013. Emphatic polarity particles in Spanish and Catalan. Lingua 1281, 9–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breitbarth, Anne, De Clercq, Karen and Haegeman, Liliane (eds). 2013. The syntax of polarity emphasis. Lingua 1281, 1–8 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briz, Antonio, Pons, Salvador and Portolés, José (coords.). 2008. Diccionario de partículas discursivas del español (DPDE). Available at [URL] [last accessed 2 December 2014].
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Crosslinguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco and Zegrean, Iulia. 2010. Splitting up Force: evidence from discourse particles. GIST 2 Conference: Main Clause Phenomena. Ghent (Belgium),
Demonte, Violeta and Fernández Soriano, Olga. 2009. Force and finiteness in Spanish complemetizer system. Probus 211, 23–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Evidentials dizque and que in Spanish. Grammaticalization, parameters and the (fine) structure of Comp. Linguística. Revista de Estudos linguísticos da Universidade do Porto.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2002. The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Etxepare, Ricardo. 1997. The Grammatical Representation of Speech Events. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Maryland.
. 2010. From hearsay evidentiality to samesaying relations. Lingua 120, 3, 604–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garrido, Joaquín. 1998. Discourse structure in grammar. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense, 61, 49–63.Google Scholar
González i Planas, Francesc. 2010. Cartografia de la recomplementaciò en les llengues romàniques. Unpublished master’s thesis. Universitat de Girona,
. 2012. On quotative recomplementation: Between pragmatics and morphosyntax, manuscript. Universitat de Girona, Girona.
Gras, Pedro. 2011. Gramática de construcciones en interacción. Propuesta de un modelo y aplicación al análisis de estructuras independientes con marcas de subordinación en español. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Barcelona. Available at [URL] [last accessed 2 December 2014].
Hernanz, María Luisa. 2006. Emphatic Polarity and C in Spanish. In Studies in Spanish Syntax, Laura Brugè (ed.), 105–150. Venecia: Università Ca‘ Foscari.Google Scholar
. 2007. From polarity to modality. Some (A)symmetries between bien and sí in Spanish. In Coreference, Modality, and Focus, Luis Eguren and Olga Fernández-Soriano (eds), 133–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernanz, María Luisa and Rigau, Gemma. 2007. Variación dialectal y periferia izquierda. In Andolin Gogoan: Essays in Honour of Professor Eguzkitza, Beatriz Fernández and Itziar Laka (eds), 435–452. Bilbao: Euskal Herriko Unibersitateko Argitalpen Zerbitzua.Google Scholar
Hill, Virginia. 2007. Romanian adverbs and the pragmatic field. The Linguistic Review 24, 1, 61–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. A main clause complementizer. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman and Rachel Nye (eds), 279–295. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel and Escandell, Mª. Victoria. 2009. Fronting and Verum Focus in Romance. In Focus and Background in Romance Languages, Andreas Dufter and Daniel Jacob (eds), 155–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martins, Ana Maria 2013. Emphatic Polarity in European Portuguese and beyond. Lingua 1281: 95–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paoli, Sandra. 2006. The fine structure of the left periphery: COMPs and subjects. Evidence from Romance. Lingua 1171, 1057–1079. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia and Zanuttini, Raffaella. 2013. Emphasis as reduplication: Evidence from sì che/no che sentences. Lingua 1281, 124–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pons, Salvador. 1998. Conexión y conectores. Valencia: Universidad de Valencia.Google Scholar
. 2003. Que inicial átono como marca de modalidad. ELUA 171, 531–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Porroche, Margarita. 2000. Algunos aspectos del uso de que en el español conversacional (que como introductor de oraciones ‘independientes’). CLAC 31.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar: A handbook of generative syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez Ramalle, Teresa M. 2007. El complementante que como marca enfática en el texto periodístico. Revista electrónica RAEL (Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada) 61, 41–53.Google Scholar
. 2008. El valor de las marcas enunciativas en la configuración del discurso en el ámbito de las lenguas romances. Available at [URL] [last accessed 2 December 2014].
Speas, Margaret and Tenny, Carol. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. In Asymmetry in Grammar, Ana María Di Sciullo (ed.), 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thurmair, Maria. 1989. Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen. [Linguistische Arbeiten 223], Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1995. Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 26, 1, 79–123.Google Scholar
Villa García, Julio. 2010. Recomplementation and locality of movement in Spanish, Second General Examination Paper. University of Connecticut.
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Thaler, Verena
2020. Sí queals polyphone Struktur im gesprochenen Spanisch. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 71:1 ► pp. 305 ff. DOI logo
Kocher, Anna
2017. From verum to epistemic modality and evidentiality. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7:1-2 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Kocher, Anna
2018. Epistemic and evidential modification in Spanish and Portuguese. Languages in Contrast 18:1 ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.